Yearly Archives: 2003

About once a week, someone writes to ask what program I use to do the graphics on this site.  Actually, I use several but my favorite — and the one in which I design all the logos and borders and such — is Xara X, which is a vector drawing program that does all sorts of neat things.  Here's a banner ad for it…

The Xara folks make a number of great graphics programs, including one called Xara Webstyle that provides an ultra-simple way to generate logos, backgrounds, menus and other images to jazz up your website.  I used Webstyle to make the first version of this site, and liked it tremendously.  So I've decided to plug them here and, yes, this is another one of those deals where this site receives a commission on your purchases.  But if you know me, you know I can't be bought.  Rented, maybe.  Leased, definitely.  But bought?  Never.

Yesterday, Phil Donahue aired an hour with Dennis Miller, primarily talking about going to war — a topic about which those two men vehemently (but respectfully) disagree.  Not that he'll lose a wink of sleep over this or even read it, but I have to say that my opinion of Mr. Miller has fallen off somewhat since his 9/11 conversion to "Rowdy" Roddy Piper.  There are good, rational reasons for the U.S. going to war against Iraq and maybe a few other hellholes.  I'm not sure I concur that the pluses outweigh the minuses, or that we're getting an honest assessment of either, but I grudgingly buy the argument that certain warlike actions may be warranted if all else fails.

What scares me — and what seems to be the sole mindset behind Miller's rants — is this notion that we have to go to war because we're the Good Guys, they're the Bad Guys, and it's time the Good Guys killed a large group of the Bad Guys and scared the crap out of the rest of them.  If we go to war, let it be because that's our best course of self-defense, not because someone's testosterone deficiency has them jonesing to beat up on a little guy.  (And, though this does not relate to Dennis Miller: …not because someone thinks it'll be good for business and/or their approval rating.)

As with many who feel as he does, Miller did not seem to want to address minor points having to do with things like killing innocent civilians, spending trillions of dollars, encouraging reprisals or that old bugaboo of what we may do to the environment.  He urged that we frighten Korea by conducting a couple of well-publicized nuclear tests and, when Donahue asked what that could do to the environment, Dennis said, "The caribou will have to wait," and Phil, being polite and pressed for time, didn't ask if nuclear testing could conceivably affect, say, human beings.  Or even make someone feel more pressured to nuke us first.

But then, I don't get that some of these folks remember that actions have consequences.  At one point on the broadcast, Miller made a reference to having sex with sheep, complete with the "f" word, and then remembering he was on live TV, he turned to Donahue and asked, "We're on a delay, right?  They're bleeping me, right?"  They weren't, at least insofar as the East Coast was concerned.  During the next commercial, someone informed Miller that he'd just said what he'd said on live, non-HBO TV and when they came back from the break, he muttered a slight apology and told his host that it was stupid not to have a tape delay on a show of that sort.

Now, I don't think saying that word on MSNBC is going to matter one bit in the world.  It wouldn't even matter if it was uttered on a show that someone besides me was watching.  But Dennis Miller was live on Saturday Night Live.  Dennis Miller was live on Monday Night Football.  Dennis Miller was even live on Dennis Miller Live.  The man understands the concept of live television and has usually appeared on it without a tape delay.  He has also spent an awful lot of airtime blasting people who don't accept personal responsibility for their actions.  But apparently, it's the Donahue show's fault that he was heard saying something he said but didn't mean to have heard.

And it's also the first time I've ever seen a professional comedian complain about not being censored.

Michael Kinsley explains about the current Congressional battle over seating new judges.

TV Land has been running a great series on Sunday nights — The 60 Minutes Interviews.  It recycles old footage (including some never before broadcast) of interviews done on 60 Minutes with famous folks in the teevee biz.  This coming Sunday is their chat with Johnny Carson.

One of the "new generation" of artists in MAD Magazine is my old pal, Bill Wray.  I worked with Bill when he was just starting out and trying to draw like all the artists he admired.  Most fledgling artists do that and a few enlightened ones have a moment of revelation and begin to draw like themselves.  Bill, happily, had one and blossomed into a unique and imaginative presence in the cartoon/comic world…to the extent that there are probably now fledglings trying to draw like him.  They can get a nice look at his handiwork over on his new website, www.bigblownbaby.com, named for one of his more innovative comics.  Or if you're anywhere near Dallas, he's having his first art show (along with Miles Thomson) from March 1 through April 5 at the Forbidden Gallery there.  If I were anywhere near Dallas next month, I'd sure go.

Effective in 60 days, cell phones and pagers are banned in Broadway theaters.  This article doesn't give too many details but I assume the fine is levied if they catch you talking on one or if yours goes off.  I'd be interested in knowing if this applies to silent pagers or the use of cell phones during intermission.

Like all of you, I've always been annoyed when some audience member's cell phone went off during a performance — and I was especially mortified once when it was mine.  Two years ago, while seeing Follies in New York, I dutifully turned off my phone before the show started but apparently, I accidentally bumped its "on" button and turned it back on.  At a key dramatic moment in the second act, it rang — and I thought everyone for six rows around was going to drag me into the aisle and throttle me.  Which would have been more than justified.

I didn't answer it.  Instead, I ripped the back off and yanked the battery out.  Since then, if I have my cell phone with me at a show, I always remove the battery.  Better that than having someone in the audience remove part of my insides.

Just watched the new DVD of Top Secret!, a movie I (and most people) thought had a rather clumsy storyline and jokes of widely-varying mirth.  It was fascinating to listen to the audio commentary track and hear the film's producers and directors say essentially the same thing.  The tone is along the lines of, "Jeez, why did we do that?"  After experiencing too many self-congratulatory narratives on DVDs, it was somehow refreshing to hear a bunch of talented guys discussing how and why things didn't work, and without trashing their co-workers or blaming the studio.  Actually, a lot of the movie does work, though not as well as Airplane!, which was the previous motion picture most of the same people.

The DVD is well-assembled, with the usual kinds of special features and such.  There's a gallery of storyboard panels, many of which (they don't point out) were drawn by the acclaimed cartoonist, Carol Lay.  There's also an "Easter Egg" special feature that is most welcome.  One of the sillier scenes in the movie is one that runs backwards so that the dialogue sounds like the actors are all speaking Swedish.  If you know where to look, you can access a copy of that scene played forward — i.e., the way it was filmed.

Here's a link if you want to buy this movie from Amazon.Com.  I suggest this not only because I enjoyed the film but because if you buy it through that link, I get money.  And, speaking of me getting money…

Plug time! Yeah, there's another Groo book out by Sergio and Yours Truly.  This one's called Death and Taxes, and it collects a story about war that is becoming sadly relevant to all our lives.  The official promo copy reads: "The three most inevitable things in the world are death, taxes, and another Groo collection from Dark Horse.  This one is about the other two: Groo and his loyal pooch Rufferto encounter a king who is forever raising the cost of living and an undertaker who drives up the cost of dying.  So the kingdom goes to war against…well, they're not exactly sure of that part yet.  But they're definitely going to war.  What a time for Groo to be trapped in a solemn vow not to kill.  And if you think that makes him any less dangerous, you don't know Groo.  He's even worse…as the savage warrior, Odoman the Invincible, finds out the hard way."

While you're ordering it, pre-order The Groo Odyssey, which should be out any day now.

And now Joe Creig writes to ask, "One thing I've never understood is why it's possible for a movie to be nominated for Best Picture but not for Best Director.  Isn't the best movie the one that was the best directed?"

Answer: That may or may not be the case, but the real answer is that it isn't the same voting body in both categories.  The Best Director is voted on just by the branch of the Academy that covers directors, whereas Best Picture is voted upon by the entire membership.  So it's kind of like asking why a majority of voters in Arizona went for George W. Bush, whereas a majority of those nationwide chose Al Gore.  It's a different roster of voters.

VH-1 is rerunning the Michael Jackson interview/documentary on Saturday, Sunday and Monday. In case you weren't sufficiently creeped-out the first time.

A message from from Shelly Goldstein reminds me that Richard Gere won the Golden Globe for Best Actor, not Best Supporting Actor.  And Joe Creig writes to ask why the Academy doesn't set up rules as to how much screen time denotes a Lead Performer as opposed to a Supporting Performer.  I suppose there are two answers to Joe's question, one being that it's a subjective distinction, and any firm number is going to be arbitrary and arguable.

The other reason is that the Oscars — and this is true of the Emmys and the Tonys and any of these — exists because the Hollywood community wants to give itself awards for reasons of ego and hyping the box office.  No one wants rules that might exclude them from winning.  In fact, the relevant committees that govern each award are constantly being petitioned to loosen things up and give entrants more latitude — and they usually say no.  The administrators are generally afraid to make any decree that might cause some influential industry figure to scream that they lost an award because of a rule change.  Unless there's a huge outcry to fix a problem, they'll leave things as loose as possible.  That way, when someone doesn't get a trophy, it's because of the voters, not the rules committee.

If only to get a little blogging crossover going here, let me respond to my friend Peter David who, this morning, asks the musical question…

How in the HELL can Richard Gere be bypassed for "Chicago" while John C. Reilly was nominated in the same category.  Reilly was very moving in his portrayal, yes, but Gere was outstanding.  And when a film gets thirteen nominations and Gere is ignored, that's a slap in the face.  For that matter, when Christopher Walken is nominated for his perfectly good, but not outstanding, work in "Catch Me If You Can" instead of Gere, it's a kick in the crotch besides.

I think the easy answer is that Miramax pushed Mr. Gere for Best Actor, not Best Supporting Actor.  Gere wasn't beaten out by Reilly or Walken but by Jack Nicholson, Daniel Day-Lewis, etc.  That probably makes a little more sense.

Just how these folks are submitted and promoted has a lot to do with whether they get nominated or not — and it should be noted that it isn't always the studio's decision.  Some stars have it in their contracts that they get to decide, and it is not uncommon (when it's arguable) to look at the field of contenders and pick your fight.  When Walter Matthau and George Burns starred in The Sunshine Boys, many onlookers were baffled that Burns was submitted in the supporting category — but the studio was undoubtedly thinking as follows:  If they both were submitted for Best Actor, they'd split the vote of folks who liked that movie, and Burns wouldn't stand a chance against the other contenders for that year, who included not only Matthau but Jack Nicholson (for One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest) and Al Pacino (for Dog Day Afternoon).  The candidates for the supporting statuette weren't as formidable so they put him there and, sure enough, he won not only a nomination but the little gold statuette, as well.

That kind of thinking was probably in play here.  Chicago submitted Renée Zellwegger in the Best Actress category, and Catherine Zeta-Jones in the supporting group where there was more room.  They could have pushed Zeta-Jones for Best Actress but they decided to risk her splitting the votes (with Queen Latifah) in the lesser classification, rather than endanger Zellwegger's chances in the top category.  In that case, it worked and all three were nominated.  Gere may have insisted he be submitted as a lead or the studio may have felt that, given the other contenders, he stood a better chance there.  But it was probably more of a strategic decision than one based on the merits of his work.

As for him not being nominated there…well, there are many good reasons not to take things like the Academy Awards too seriously, and one is that they nominate a fixed number, regardless of the quantity of excellence around.  If there are 20 outstanding performances in a year, they nominate five.  And if there are 3 outstanding performances in a year, they nominate five.  This year, as usual, it was inevitable that some categories would have some worthy who would lose the game of Musical Chairs.  As my Uncle Aaron used to say, "Never feel sorry for anyone who makes more than a million dollars a year."

Once upon a time in this country, it was blasphemy to suggest that FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover was not a great hero and a man of unblemished integrity.  Since then, ol' J. Edgar's rep has suffered a lot with accusations of ignoble spying, the framing of political enemies, and an occasional tendency to lounge about his home in a pink taffeta gown with matching wrap.  And there's one more blight on his record that's worth noting, if only to remind us that government officials can and will do such things…

As explained before on this website (and here in a better and longer article done for Atomic magazine by James Gordon Meek) Hoover went after MAD magazine.  In 1958, he took umbrage at what now seems like an utterly harmless article in that silly publication, and dispatched agents to intimidate and dig up dirt.  Nothing came of it, of course, but it adds to the long list of things we pretend can't happen in this great land of ours.

I know I mentioned this before but I wanted to link to the Meek article, and I wanted to mention that the new issue of Mad XL (which goes on sale next week in most areas) has a nice piece on the whole matter.  Mad XL is a sister magazine to MAD that is mostly composed of reprints.  But every issue, they whip up a few new features, often of a historical nature.  This one reprints some of the FBI internal memos (available online here) and some of Mad's replies.  It's amazing that Hoover became a hero — especially to Americans who profess to believe in "law and order" — when he spent so much of his time on trivia unrelated to the actual breaking of laws.  You listening, Mr. Ashcroft?

Once again, I have posted a picture of a can of Campbell's Cream of Mushroom soup — the traditional Internet symbol indicating that the proprietor of the weblog is too busy with pressing deadlines to update his site.  As I needn't explain but will, it means that the operator of the website is swamped but that he'll resume posting in a day or so, and that he doesn't want you to think he's neglecting you and that you're not important.  I may be busy but I'm never too busy to post the can of Campbell's Cream of Mushroom soup.

In the meantime, I would like to suggest that those of you interested in the Iraq situation go read this interview with Mario Cuomo over in Salon.  I think you can read it without clicking through a mess of ads but even if that's necessary, do it.

Hanna-Barbera fans will want to spend some time prowling around on this Brazilian site.  There you will find all sorts of audio and video clips of H-B favorites — some in English, some not.  I especially enjoy the escapades of Dom Pixote (Huckleberry Hound) and Pepe Legal (Quick Draw McGraw).

We have a winner! Quite a few of you sent me links to online companies that sell short video cables.  I could have ordered from several, but I ordered from MCM Electronics, and will let you know how it goes.  Thanks to Joey Helleny for the tip, and thanks to all who sent me other suggestions.

Does anyone out there know of a company — preferably one on the Internet — that sells video cables in short lengths?  I'm especially in need of an S-Video to S-Video cable that's about a foot long.  The shortest I seem to be able to find from the dealers is three feet.  A/V cables in foot-long and 18" lengths could also help tidy things up around here.  Drop me a line if you have any suggestions.  Thanks.